-
Trade advances, which are in the nature of commercial transactions would not fall within the ambit of the word advance in section 2(22)(e) of the Act.
Today Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29509 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 2(22)(e)
-
In the professional field there are innovative ways visualized by the professional to make themselves visible and to build their own professional profile for generating higher and value added business, and such scholarships created is visibility in international arena and his social standing.
Harish N. Salve Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29500 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37
-
When Revenue did not made any additions u/s 69A, CIT(A) was justified in considering the same source of income at appellate stage and was justified in making enhancement.
Shri Praveen Garg Vs The Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29477 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
There is a difference between conditions laid out for registration u/s 12AA and prerequisites for claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab).
IMC of ITI Dadri Vs ITO (Exemption)
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29474 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 10(23C)(iiiab)
-
Reimbursement cannot be treated as revenue receipts.
ASG Overseas Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29473 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 153A
-
There would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c). Mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee.
IKEA Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29472 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271(1)(c)
-
Even as per the amended provisions of Sec.254(2A), the assessee has paid more than 50% of the total demand except for AY 2014-15 which can be adjusted with the extra amount deposited by the assessee.
Microsoft India (R & D) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29447 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Section 54F(1) is a mandatory and substantive provision while section 54F(4) is only a procedural section.
Ashok Kumar Wadhwa Vs ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29444 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 54F
-
It is a case of simple clerical error and there is no case of contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant.
Ceramic Tableware Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29441 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Where there are two possible views and the Assessing Officer has taken one of the possible views, no action to exercise powers of revision can arise, nor can revisional power be exercised for directing a fuller enquiry to find out if the view taken is erroneous.
Genpact Consulting [Singapore] Pte Ltd Vs The C.I.T
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29417 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
CIT(A) can tax the income which the Revenue had expressly or impliedly held as non-taxable but the CIT(A) cannot tax an item of income whose taxability had not even been considered by the Revenue.
Angel Cement Pvt. Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29395 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Assessee sold the property on behalf of a non-resident and transferred the money to the non-resident and according to Sec.163, assessee is an agent of the non-resident.
Manish Tyagi Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29385 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
The application for rectification of the order passed by ITAT amounts to review of its own order passed by the ITAT, which is not permissible.
Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd Vs The ACIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29357 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
TDS is not payable on payments made to agencies like HUDA on behalf of the State Government in light of clarification provided by Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Haryana and thus, penalty under Section 271C was deleted.
Satya Developers Pvt. Ltd Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29356 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 271C
-
Though catena of judgments have been cited by the ld. counsel and how they are applicable on the facts of the case, the same are not being discussed because the case is being decided on the facts and material brought on record and the findings of the ld. CIT(A).
Arizona Ventures Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29341 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
Sitting fees is the part and parcel of remuneration of the Director and hence has an element of salary for which taxes should be deducted.
HLS Asia Ltd Vs DCIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29340 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 194J
-
For the purpose of determination of ‘market price’ of power u/s 80IA(4) r.w.s. 80IA(8), where multiple options of price of a product are available, then the price which is more favourable to the assessee needs to be adopted.
Hero Motocorp Ltd Vs Addl. CIT
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29338 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
When a person has been absolved by SEBI and Revenue has not placed any material to prove involvement of assesse, there remains no justification to hold amount as unexplained credit u/s 68.
Mukesh Mittal Vs Income tax Officer
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29334 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 68
-
The interest received on compensation to the assessee is nothing but a capital receipt and the addition is against the law.
Nariender Kumar Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29292 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 56(2)(viii)
-
Interest u/s 201(1A) does not assume the character of business expenditure and also cannot be regarded as compensatory payment.
New Modern Bazaar Departmental Store Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO
(2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29290 (ITAT-DELHI) · Section 37(1)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.